Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GVTucker who wrote (165116)	5/14/2002 12:00:12 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Boy, I read through the documents. The only thing I found where interest payments disguised as "energy" payments. There was no hint. No statement, no disclosure what so ever that I could find. Even the "restatements" of Condor, after it had been discovered were not disclosed. Can you cut and paste anything that you feel should have been a hint. Please note, I am not saying it was not discernable. Anyone who was curious, and who had a need to know and with the financial training would have been put on notice because the manner and amount of the revenue far exceeded the earnings scenario presented by the company, BUT there was NOTHING disclosed. Perhaps, if you have the time you could find some language that you feel was disclosure. Thanks in Advance. Duke.

To: GVTucker who wrote (165116)	5/14/2002 12:05:31 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

GV, <there were several red flags for any investor that bothered to read through the documents.> Funny how all of the "buy" and "strong buy" analysts missed these red flags. If there were even one or two glaringly obvious flags, I doubt we would have had as many "buy" lemmings during the Enron decline. One would have blown the whistle (a lot of motivation to do so, if you think about it), and others would have followed. Don't you agree? Tenchusatsu